MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161842057 · doi:10.1109/twc.2006.1673103

SER of selection diversity MFSK with channel estimation errors

2006· article· en· W2161842057 on OpenAlexaff
Yunfei Chen, Norman C. Beaulieu

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Wireless Communication Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity combiningEstimatorFadingNoise (video)Selection (genetic algorithm)Independent and identically distributed random variablesComputer scienceAlgorithmStatisticsFrequency-shift keyingChannel (broadcasting)Signal-to-noise ratio (imaging)MathematicsTelecommunicationsNoise powerSpeech recognitionPower (physics)DemodulationArtificial intelligenceRandom variablePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The performance of the selection diversity combiner in slowly and flatly fading channels is studied. Unlike most previous works where perfect knowledge of the signal amplitude and the noise power is assumed, in this analysis, knowledge of the signal amplitude and the noise power is obtained by using practical estimators that introduce estimation errors. The average symbol error rate of the combiner is derived for noncoherent M-ary frequency shift keying signals, independent and non-identically distributed diversity branches and unequal noise powers. The effect of estimation errors on the performance of the combiner is evaluated and illustrated by numerical examples. An interesting and useful conclusion is that it is disadvantageous to employ signal-to-noise ratio as a branch selection criterion when the branch noise powers are known a priori to be equal

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Wireless CommunicationsSame topicAdvanced Wireless Communication TechniquesFrench-language works237,207